The power of the Civil Court in settling property disputes under the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, particularly Section 53 and 53-A, is intact and does not require any reference by the authorities.

1. This writ petition came to be posted on being specially ordered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice vide order dated 16.08.2011.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner Trust represented by three Trustees, challenges an order dated 15.05.2001 passed by the first respondent viz., Director of Elementary Education, Chennai and after setting aside the same seeks for restoration of the Management of Saivaprakasa Vidhyasalai Middle School, Udangudi allegedly founded by the Trust in the year 1916 and the petitioners' being the owner, founder and Educational Agency of the said school and who are deprived of the Management of the school illegally and arbitrarily by respondents 1 and 2 without any notice and without following due process of law, the same should be returned to them and the salary to the teachers should also be disbursed only through the petitioner Trust and they must be allowed to constitute the School Committee.

3. The writ petition was admitted on 21.12.2001. In the application for interim injunction, only notice was ordered. Subsequently, the interim injunction application came to be dismissed on 28.08.2003.

4. It must be noted that the impugned order itself came to be passed on the petitioner filing W.P.No.7402 of 2000 before this Court claiming for a similar relief. By an order dated 26.04.2000, this Court without going into the merits of the case merely directed the respondents to consider and pass suitable orders on the representations dated 18.12.1998 and 07.10.1999 within a time frame.

5. After getting a direction to the respondents, the three petitioners claiming to be the Trustees of the petitioner Trust sent a representation dated 18.03.2001 to the first respondent. Considering the said representation, the impugned order came to be made. The petitioner claimed that the Trust was established in the year 1916 and the 4 Founders and Authors of the Trust were paternal ancestors of the present petitioners. The petitioners' great grandfather and his brother purchased the school lands by registered sale deeds and constructed the school building. The stone inscription established in the school will show that the school was established by the petitioners' paternal ancestors. A permanent recognition was granted to the said School by an order dated 09.01.1925. They have dedicated the entire properties to the Trust and hence, all the properties of the school were only that of the Trust. The Trustees never alienated or transferred the properties or the right of the Management by any legal document including to one Saivaprakasa Vidhyasalai Paripalana Sangam, which is a Society registered on 22.07.1926. The said society has no locus standi or right to gift the Trust properties to the Government. Therefore, the gift deed dated 06.01.1968 is only void and non est in the eye of law. The Trustees are in continuous enjoyment and possession of the Trust properties and also paying the water charges to the school building. The District educational authorities have released Government grant to the educational agency namely the Trust through its Manager till 31.12.1976 even after the alleged gift deed for over nine years. The execution of the gift deed was a real fraud on the Government. The person who signed the gift deed was not even the resident of Udangudi and it was registered at Tirunelveli and not at the Sub Registrar Office, Udangudi, in which jurisdiction the properties lie. One Namasivaya Mudaliar and his son Thirunavukkarasu and his daughter in law's brohter Rmalakshmanan have connived with other close relatives to cause irreparable loss and hardship to the Trust. The said Namasivaya Mudaliyar was a school teacher and retired as headmaster in the year 1962 and settled at Srivilluputhur. None of the donors were living in the village. The society itself has become defunct in the year 1946. Since the owners of the property have not gifted the deed, the gift itself is void. The District Educational officer is not a comp